MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3134890201 · doi:10.1177/0964663921999696

The Struggle for the Human Right to a Good Life for Everyone: Oscar Correas’s Legacy for the <i>Crítica Jurídica</i> Movement in Latin America

2021· article· en· W3134890201 on OpenAlexaff
Mauro Cristeche, César Ramos Villena

Bibliographic record

VenueSocial & Legal Studies · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHistorical and Contemporary Political Dynamics
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMarxist philosophyLatin AmericansOriginalitySociologyHuman rightsMovement (music)Perspective (graphical)LawCritical legal studiesLaw and economicsPolitical scienceEpistemologyComparative lawPhilosophySocial sciencePoliticsLegal realismAesthetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Oscar Correas has been one of the promoters and main references of the Crítica Jurídica movement in Latin America due to his theoretical contributions and his permanent activism to develop the movement. In this paper, we firstly review his vast academic and intellectual career, and then we go through and analyse some of Correas’s main contributions to the study of the law and the Marxist thought. Special focus will be given to: (a) his approach to Marx’s works and its extension to the analysis of modern law; (b) his understanding of Hans Kelsen’s theory; and (c) Correas’s critical contributions to the debate on human rights. We aim to highlight the originality and wit of Oscar Correas’s work, and its importance for the development of the legal critical studies and debates on legal and human rights challenges from a critical perspective.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.043
Threshold uncertainty score0.099

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0120.040
Scholarly communication0.0100.005
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0040.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.051
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.247 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSocial & Legal StudiesSame topicHistorical and Contemporary Political DynamicsFrench-language works237,207